So while the Oscars and Kathryn Bigelow’s terse and sparsely worded Zero Dark Thirty flirted with each other this Sunday... another take on global terrorism, John Moore’s A Good Day to Die Hard is in theatres. While the two films deal with terrorism and its relationship with America, the treatment is radically different. In Zero Dark Thirty, Bigelow keeps the tone strictly realistic... almost like a documentary filmmaker as Jessica Chastain’s Maya spends long, occasionally hopeless years trying to piece together the puzzle of Osama Bin Laden’s disappearance. There are no concessions made to cinematic licence. No obvious jingoism or dramatic interventions or musical flourishes. Just a matter-of-fact account of how one woman stubbornly, obsessively went on chasing clues till a trail led her to Osama’s fortress in Abbottabad. Nothing however really cuts deep or becomes real in A Good Day to Die Hard. This movie is an unabashed entertainer with terrorism being used just as a peg to hang all the cliches about an all American hero like John McClane who is virtually impervious to terrorism-induced sudden deaths and has run four previous movies on his indestructible shoulders. He has no time
for subtlety. He is a man of action and instant reaction. Someone who kills for family and America and makes it look like a picnic where everyone is invited.
He survives explosions and impossible-to-escape rat traps, just with a few nicks and scars, leaving crackling one liners in his wake. this formula works every time — the world gets saved, God blesses America and we go home happy. That said, it is not really easy to make films about terrorism, especially if you take entertainment out of them. Then it becomes hard to address the real questions about terrorism. What is the root cause of terrorism? Can it be uprooted ethically without occupying other nations, attacking innocent citizens and calling them collateral damage? How does one define terrorism? 9/11 was terrorism but the nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn’t? The American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan wasn’t? Is Hollywood willing to explore their own country’s share in global terror?
And what about India? Is not state-sponsored genocide terrorism? Films like Mani Ratnam’s Roja, Dil Se, Gulzar’s Machis as well as Anurag Kashyap’s Black Friday tried to explore the reasons why certain innocent people either become pawns in the hands of forces bigger than them or take up arms. Kunal Kohli’s Fanaa Bollywoodised the issue of Kashmir and Kurbaan focused on the human side of jihad but failed. Neeraj Pandey’s A Wednesday despite being a taut, well-written thriller simplified the issue of terrorism by promoting an eye-for-an-eye ideology where killing terrorists was equated with pest control!
Most of the time, films about terrorism steer clear of really sensitive issues and instead focus on human drama and sensationalism. There is no doubt that Ram Gopal Varma’s forthcoming film based on 26/11 will focus only on the events during the Mumbai attacks and on the ensuing fear, violence and tragedy and not much else. Nishikanth Kamath’s Mumbai Meri Jaan however, was a sensitive insight into lives deeply affected by terrorist attacks. How violence changes people and takes away their innocence and alters their world view forever and how even in the worst of times, sometimes, delicate yet strong human bonds are forged.
In an increasingly divided world where political agendas, economic inequality, religious intolerance, brutal governments, ideological propaganda and more have created a never ending cycle of violence and retribution, we need more voices in cinema, music, literature and every other form of art to react to terrorism with introspection and wisdom. There is nothing wrong with entertainment in films about terrorism but at some point we must realise that killing people and mass murder are not things we should be consuming over popcorn.
(Reema Moudgil is the author of Perfect Eight, editor of unboxedwriters.com and an RJ)